Skip to main content

About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
the 2014 handover to afghan authorities. our pentagon correspondent chris lawrence has been looking into this. what's being considered for a u.s. role in afghanistan after the scheduled pull-out? >> reporter: if you thought 2014 was going to be the end of u.s. troops' involvement, that does not look to be the case. although publicly pentagon officials say it's too early, our source, a u.s. official is telling us that there are several options being discussed inside the pentagon, one of which is to keep about 10,000 u.s. troops in afghanistan past 2014. a small number of those troops would be special operations forces that would be dedicated to counterterrorism missions. the rest of the forces would either be training or advising afghan troops or providing medical support and air support, things like that. there are other options with fewer troops, some with more troops. but this one fits right in the middle of that spectrum. he also told me that one of the deal-breakers when it came to iraq, immunity for u.s. troop, in other words, that they wouldn't be prosecuted under local laws l
combat is outdated, unfair, and actually bad for their careers. cnn pentagon correspondent barbara starr is joining us. tell us who these women are and what exactly they want changed. >> well, suzanne, these particular women are veterans of the wars in iraq and afghanistan and like many military women, they are getting very frustrated about the rules here because basically many jobs have been opened to women but women are still legally prohibited by the military from serving in front line combat positions. these women say it's keeping them from advancing in their careers and that the reality of war, of course, is that women are in combat these days. one of them even helicopter pilot, she was shot down, wounded, and got a purple heart. listen to what one of these women had to say about their concerns. >> the policy limits my future in the marine corps. i would be assigned to positions based on my gender rather than my qualifications or accomplishments. this doesn't make sense to me personally or professionally and frankly doesn't make sense to the military. >> what they are saying is, loo
for the military. the pentagon is well funded. your regional commander could go out. i agree with your critique. the way to get to the source of the critique is not that, you know, susan rice or anybody else doesn't understood what you said. it's to follow the money and give the u.s. the tools. >> shouldn't we rethink where the money goes? one of the reasons diplomatic security is underfunded. the cuts between the state department. the balance between state, diplomacy and military are way off. >> i think the overall issue is susan rice, should she be confirmed and will she be confirmed? john kerry could get the massachusetts seat. that may be in the background. the bottom line is confirmation. you are supposed to tell the truth. if you don't, it's bad. no question. there ought to be instant replay, overwhelming evidence to overrule it when the referee is wrong. there needs to be overwhelming evidence not to support the president's nomination. i think it's unfair to play on this one. >> we have an amazing bit of tape of john mccain making a somewhat similar argument. we'll show it to you after t
for the military solution because the pentagon is well funded and your regional commander has much more ability to go out and act on behalf of the u.s. than the ambassador does. so i agree with your critique, but the way to get to the source of the critique is not that susan rice doesn't understand, but it's to follow the money and -- >> but should we rethink our priorities as to where the money goes. the cuts to the state department, the balance between defense and state, diplomacy and military, are way off in our country. >> i think the issue with susan rice and will and should she be confirmed? i think the republicans would rather have john kerry give them a chance to get the massachusetts seat. but the bottom line is confirmation, yeah, you're supposed to tell the truth and if you don't, that's bad, no question. but there ought to be like instant replay. you have to have overwhelming evidence to overrule it, even when the referee is wrong. there has to be overwhelming evidence to not support the president's nomination. >> we have an amazing bit of tape of john mccain making a somewhat simil
the pentagon hoping to force the military to drop its policy that excludes them from thousands of ground combat positions. all four women are veterans of the war in iraq and afghanistan. they main the combat exclusion role is discriminatory. >> the policy limits my future in the marine corps. i would be assigned to positions based on my gender rather than on my qualifications or my accomplishments. this didn't make sense personally or politically and it did not make sense for the military. >> she also says this prevents commanders from deciding the best way to fight. >>> so what would you do with $500 million? that's tonight's record-shattering powerball jackpot expected to climb higher. millions of americans in 42 states are trying to parlay $2 into half a billion. alison kosik is live from times square this morning. what's happening there? 60% of ticket sales are expected to be made today. we know the odds are pretty slim, but people are still going for it. >> reporter: they are still going for it. you know, you talk about the odds, the odds are slim. 175 million to 1 are the odds that you'll
on the plans for u.s. troop withdrawal from ban began in 2014. the white house and the pentagon must gauge the best strategy moving for as the afghans position to provide the bulk of security. one plan will rely on special forces to keep up the pressure on terrorists that is only one plan. jennifer griffin live at the pentagon with more details. jennifer? >> reporter: hi, jenna. it is not surprising now that the election is over we're starting to hear plans floated through the press what the u.s. military commitment wit look like post-2014 in afghanistan. u.s. dip low mats are negotiating a withdrawal of forces agreement with afghanistan. general john allen was preparing for his confirmation hearing for his next job when he got pulled into the e-mail scandal that brought down david petraeus. at that time he was expected to begin formulating a post-2014 plan before leaving afghanistan and becoming supreme allied commander in europe. he is now back in afghanistan and reports are he would like to keep about 60,000 troops in afghanistan through the fighting season of next year. defense secreta
to our pentagon correspondent barbara starr. barbara, what are you learning? >> well, wolf, north korea says it is pursuing trying to launch a satellite into space. but intelligence services around the world doubt that that is true. this satellite image of a north korean missile launch pad was just snapped in the last 24 hours. u.s. government officials and private experts say it shows the same types of preparations including trucks and fuel tanks not seen since april when a long-range missile failed seconds after launch. north korea claimed then it was just trying to launch a satellite. the new digital globe image and this one taken just days before don't yet show a missile. but with these kinds of preps, a launch could happen in about three weeks if a missile is put on the launch pad according to analysis by digital globe. north korea watchers say the new leader, kim jong-un may be responding to internal political pressure from hardliners. >> on the other hand, he may also want it himself. he may decide it's the right kind of provocation just before the south korean president election
of power today, it is the size of the pentagon and those devil is actually had a bigger problem than us. but i would be interested in when you're thinking about policy, do you look at that the source of leverage, or did this restrain american options in terms of what you can do? >> with respect to the deficit and debt of the national security liability, we need our senior leadership and the ability to take it on. we have an opportunity to do so, we have a requirement to do so. the requirement and foundation of national power is ultimately economic in terms of global influence. and in terms of supporting the military. we have, i think, members of the house will step up in the coming months. >> how did you look at your surplus of the united states? do they say that we have america under control because of the treasury? >> superposition to the united states is very important. it is very decisive. so there is no intention for us with this economic relationship. >> i'm going to open it up to the floor. we have four microphones around the room. josh grogan is over here. >> thank you very muc
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8